It's a good game

>it's a good game
>but not a good [insert franchise] game

What's wrong with saying this?
As a title it is solid, but compared to the rest in its franchise it is noticeably worse.

>implying that doesn't make perfect sense

Example?

>Banjo
>But its not a Bubsy game

Arcania is a good game but not a good Gothic game.

MGS 5?

Super Paper Mario

No, it's just a bad game and that's coming from somehow that never played Gothic

>it's a good game
>but not a good Resident Evil game

That's a fine statement, the problem is expectation.

Resident Evil 1-3 are a very different breed of game from 4-6. Hell it's happening again with 7.

MechAssault wont appeal to fans for MechWarrior, SimCity 2013 wont appeal to SimCity fans, etc.

the final fantasy's past number 9

Resident evil 4 comes to mind pretty quickly. Awesome game but doesn't really carry enough elements from the previous games of the franchise.

>using 5 over 6 as your example

Assassin's Creed 4 is a good pirate game but a shit Assassin's Creed game.

>6 is a good game

Went from tactical rpg to Armored Core

There is actually a context in which this makes sense.A game could be good but fail to deliver on things that people expect from the series.

E.g. Lightning Returns: FFXIII is a good game because of its combat, customization and structure. However, it has a terrible plot and characters, something which people look for from Final Fantasy.

WoW is (was) a good MMO, pretty shitty Warcraft game.

mgs5

Gauntlet for the 360

>want to play a slow paced horror game that's similar to other entries in the series
>get a good game but also a fast paced action game with few horror elements
>you can't complain about this.

Hitman absolution

Resident Evil: Survivor

Assassins creed black flag.
Duh

Why does this thread keep popping up. People explained countless times why it's a valid statement.

Do you have autism, OP?

So true it hurts.

there is not MGS 5. It's MGS V

...

Perfect Dark Zero. It's a completely legitimate statement.

I didn't think Perfect Dark Zero was a bad game. I had fun with the multiplayer. However, it did not carry over any of the original game's themes. There wasn't any conspiracy elements which formed the entirety of the original game's story, it fucked with the Joanna Dark character completely, the cyberpunk futuristic aesthetic was watered down a lot (especially with the weapons which were almost entirely changed into 1:1 versions of existing weaponry whereas PD64's realistic guns were at least stylized), and it really just added nothing to Perfect Dark's canon.

Would I have been satisfied with it if it was any other series? Sure. But Perfect Dark Zero was not the sequel I waited years for, and its failure effectively killed the series. The only hope for a future Perfect Dark games lies in microsoft realizing it has an established female protagonist character waiting to be whored out to feminists.

It was fun to play. Its effects on the Perfect Dark series were NOT fun.

Fallout 3 and 4

ds2

For all your fucktards trying to dispute this:

OP isn't saying it doesn't make sense. He's saying it's a obnoxious thing to say and makes you look like a faggot.

@362512221
And everyone else is saying you're retarded for trying to argue this because it's a perfectly valid point.

I still play it from time to time, cover system is garbage.
I mostly play Perfect Dark Arcade though, it's just so much better than Zero

I think we need a food analogy to make this guy understand that it's not obnoxious.

I'm all out, can someone else do it?

Super Mario Brothers 2?

Damn, people are expressing opinions??? If only there was a place where everyone had the same opinions thanks to a rewards system that encouraged samethink.

Diablo 3, felt more like a cartoony WoW hack and slash than a true diablo 2 sequel

>it's valid but you can't say it

The fucktard here is you.

Banjo-Kazooie Nuts n' Bolts

Breath of fire Vç

HoMM IV

and a really fucking bad copy at that

you dont seem to understand how Sup Forums functions
if you post anime, pedofile shit and ask retarded questions you get (yous) otherwise you dont.
nu-Sup Forums is just a bunch of tumblr , reddit and Sup Forumstards

You're a fucking idiot.

looks like sonic has a spiky cock in the animation

RE4 was a perfect example of slapping a well-known name on a basically new game just for brand recognition. Even the story doesn't really fit in.

I liked it, it wasn't great but it was far from bad.

Resident Evil 6

That's exactly not what it means.

>discussion about individual video games, the franchises they exist in, and whether they have a coherency across them is talking like a faggot
time to go back to your LOL and e-celeb threads

Dark Souls 2

kys

...

halo 4 5 6

RE6 gets a bad rap because it made such a bad first impression. Once you get passed the first hour of it ripping the controls out of your hands for zomgawsum and CINEMATIC PANNING, it turns back into RE4 for the rest of the game until you get to Ada. Then Ada plays more like Spiderman.

Doom 3

>He didn't enjoy bitch slapping j'avo as Jake or performing counters

This desu

2 great arguments from the same, deeply uninformed person.

>As a title it is solid, but compared to the rest in its franchise it is noticeably worse.
That's not what it means at all.

It means that it doesn't have what you'd expect from a game in [franchise] to the point that it doesn't feel like you're playing a [franchise] game anymore, but despite that, it's still a good game. This can of course also end up meaning that additionally it's worse compared to other entries of [franchise] but that's not the point of the phrase.

>nu-uh

Zelda II: The adventure of Link

>it's a GREAT game
>and the best game by [game developer]

Fire Emblem Awakening

>it's a shit game
>even for a [insert franchise] game
??

Ys Seven and Celceta

Solid ARPGs and the bosses are as good as ever, but the inclusion of party members and fundamental changes to gameplay (no jumping, etc...) make it very different to the rest.

what is this ugly shit?

i feel sorry for you son

But HoMM IV was better than III.

Unless you're a Russian or HoMM III was literally your babbys first game most people like IV better.

I don't get why people loved this game so much. I thought it was kinda mediocre. Had some good points, but meh. Is there something I'm missing?

oh wow generic tumbl"""""""""""""art"""""""""""""""

Good choice

>no jumping
You couldn't jump in I&II, and both of the previous versions of IV though.

What fucking planet do you live on?

I just think it was really good for a telltale game
funny, good music, likeable characters

>Final Fantasy games past 9
>good games

Yeah, but after its addition in VI it was expected to stay that way. At least VIII brought it back and that game looks solid.

>but after its addition in VI it was expected to stay that way.
You could jump in III and V though.

it's also a bomb ass one piece game

989 Studios' Twisted Metal 3.

MGSV is the best example of this. No long ass cut scenes, no codec, no outlandish boss battles, a half baked story instead of an overly complicated anime-esque story and a mostly silent protagonist instead of "Metal Gear? Second floor basement?"

I'll literally never get over it

Silent Hill Shattered Memories

Probably investment in the setting and/or appreciation for Telltale visual novels. Which is fine, each to their own and all that.

Well, I didn't play V, so... Is it good?